Israel and Lebanon signed a trilateral framework agreement in Washington on Friday, with US Secretary of State Marco Rubio presiding over a ceremony that brought together the two countries’ ambassadors. The accord, the product of five rounds of direct talks mediated by the United States, establishes a sequenced process under which the Lebanese Armed Forces (LAF) are to assume security control of two initial “pilot zones” in southern Lebanon, one north and one south of the Litani River, following a verified Israeli withdrawal. The published text commits both sides to “conclusively end the conflict” and formally terminate the state of war, while conditioning further Israeli redeployments on the disarmament of non-state armed groups — a reference to Hezbollah — and the dismantling of their infrastructure. Washington pledged $100 million in humanitarian assistance and $30 million in reimbursements to strengthen the LAF, and announced a new US-facilitated military coordination group to oversee implementation.

Viewed from Jerusalem, the framework was cast as a strategic gain. Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu described it as “a severe blow to Iran,” asserting that Israel would retain a security zone in southern Lebanon until Hezbollah is disarmed and that the two areas to be vacated were positions the military “does not need.” Israeli ambassador Yechiel Leiter declared that “Iran is out, Hezbollah is out, and the road to peace between Israel and Lebanon is in.” Lebanese President Joseph Aoun, by contrast, framed the agreement as “a first step” toward restoring full sovereignty and enabling displaced civilians to return, while Prime Minister Nawaf Salam stressed that the state’s monopoly on the use of force — a principle enshrined in the Taif Agreement and UN Security Council Resolution 1701 — was already a national commitment, not a new concession.

Hezbollah, which was not a party to the talks, immediately rejected the accord. MP Hassan Fadlallah warned that Lebanese authorities “will not be able to enforce the agreement signed in Washington unless they go, with American support, to civil war,” and described the deal as an attempt to derail the parallel US-Iran negotiations. Hezbollah chief Naim Qassem had earlier demanded an unconditional and complete Israeli withdrawal. Tehran, which has insisted that the Lebanese front be resolved within its own interim agreement with Washington, views the separate track as an effort to diminish Iranian influence. The war erupted on 2 March when Hezbollah fired rockets at Israel in retaliation for the killing of Iran’s Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei in US-Israeli strikes, triggering an Israeli air and ground campaign that Lebanese authorities say has killed more than 4,200 people and displaced over a million.

The framework does not set a fixed timeline for a full Israeli withdrawal; instead, it makes progress contingent on verified disarmament and the LAF’s ability to assert exclusive control. The two pilot zones are intended as a test of the mechanism, with future areas to be agreed by mutual consent. A security annex, to be developed with US support, will detail the required measures and verification arrangements. The agreement enters a volatile environment: a fragile ceasefire has held since earlier this month, but Israel has continued to conduct strikes against what it describes as immediate Hezbollah threats. The success of the framework will depend on whether the LAF can deploy effectively in areas still shadowed by Hezbollah’s military infrastructure, and on whether the parallel US-Iran diplomatic track can absorb the new reality on the Lebanese-Israeli border.